2005 PLP 1477 (CLD)
Mst. IRSHAD YAMIN — Appellant Versus CITIBANK N.A. and others — Respondents
| Citation | 2005 PLP 1477 (CLD) |
| Forum / Court | Karachi |
| Bench Members | N/A |
| Parties | Mst. IRSHAD YAMIN — Appellant Versus CITIBANK N.A. and others — Respondents |
| Primary Law | Financial Institutions (Recovery of Finances) Ordinance (XLVI of 2001) |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 2005 PLP 1477 (CLD)?
This judgment primarily cites: Financial Institutions (Recovery of Finances) Ordinance (XLVI of 2001) as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 2005 PLP 1477 (CLD)?
The case was heard and decided by the Karachi bench comprising: N/A.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 2005 PLP 1477 (CLD) (Mst. IRSHAD YAMIN — Appellant Versus CITIBANK N.A. and others — Respondents). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- M. A. Khan for Respondent No. 1.
- Nemo for Respondents Nos.2 and 3.
- On the other hand, Mr. M. A. Khan, learned counsel for respondent No.1, fully supported the impugned order and submitted that there is no justification for interference.
- We have examined the impugned order and found that the Presiding Officer, instead of making an investigation or inquiry into the assertions made by the appellant in her said application, as required by law, summarily dismissed the same on extraneous considerations and personal assumptions as to the society's structure which, perhaps, was not called for Mr. M.A. Khan Advocate has not been able to rebut the above situation.
Headnotes / Summary
S.19(7)
Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908), S.47 & O.XXI, Rr. 58. 60
Banking Court. instead of making an investigation into assertions made by applicant, dismissed objection petition on extraneous considerations and personal assumptions
High Court accepted appeal, set aside impugned order and remanded case to Banking Court for its decision afresh.
Judgment & Decree
ATA-UR-REHMAN, J.
This is an appeal under section 22 of the Financial Institutions (Recovery of Finances) Ordinance, 2001, against the order passed on 5-7-2004 on an application under Order XXI, rules 58 and 60, read with sections 47 and 151, filed on behalf of the appellant in Execution No.23 of 2000, whereby the learned Presiding Officer of Banking Court No.2, Karachi, dismissed the same. The learnt 1 counsel for the appellant mainly contested the impugned order on the ground that the appellant had not been provided an opportunity to establish the contentions raised in the said application. He submitted that had there been a full-fledged investigation or inquiry by the learned Presiding Officer, his grievance would have been removed. On the other hand, Mr. M. A. Khan, learned counsel for respondent No.1, fully supported the impugned order and submitted that there is no justification for interference. We have examined the impugned order and found that the Presiding Officer, instead of making an investigation or inquiry into the assertions made by the appellant in her said application, as required by law, summarily dismissed the same on extraneous considerations and personal assumptions as to the society's structure which, perhaps, was not called for Mr. M.A. Khan Advocate has not been able to rebut the above situation. In these circumstances, the appeal is admitted and allowed and the case is remanded back to the learned trial Court for decision afresh on the application under Order XXI, rules 58 and 60 read with sections 47 and 151, C.P.C., which shall be deemed to be pending, according to law. S.A.K./I-31/K Case remanded.